To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

page 770

Progress Report on Brooks Foods
Anaerobic-Aerobic Lagoon System for
Tomato Waste
LARRY L. LEPPER, Manager
Research & Quality Control Department
HOWARD R. LACEY, General Manager
Brooks Foods Division
Curtice-Burns, Inc.
Mt. Summit, Indiana 47361
HISTORY
The use of lagoons i n the canning industry dates back nearly to the turn of the century.
Early lagoons were basically built to intercept and hold the waste for long periods of time,
usually a packing season, rather than to allow for continuous discharge to the receiving
stream. Early published work dates back to 1910 (I) and was aimed at utilizing the then existing treatment methods for domestic waste. Examples include reports by Illinois (2), Michigan (3), Wisconsin (4), Ohio (5), New York (6), and Warrich, McKee, Wirth and Sanborn
(7). Unattractive economics and lack of enforcement resulted in few full scale installations.
In the early I930's (8) attempts were directed toward seepage beds or rapid soil
absorption of the wastewater; however, the combination of soil conditions and the high
organic waste characteristics caused this method to fail in that the soil clogged rapidly and
as a result of the high organic loads, odors developed to a point of intolerability.
The next step was an attempt to reduce soil clogging by screening of the waste to
remove gross solids and some of the suspended matter; however, the soils still clogged and
the odors persisted. Then the search began for methods of odor control At that time the
lagoon treatment concept also changed again from absorption to storage. In the early work
(8) it was speculated that by maintaining the lagooned waste in an alkaline pH range that
biological decomposition would be accelerated and an environment created which would be
less attractive to the hydrogen sulfide producing organisms. This was attempted with
sodium hydroxide in pea waste but the result discouraged further investigation. The use of
sodium nitrate as an additive was developed in the early 1940's (9) and Sandborn noted it's
use was for correcting odor problems and not a new treatment method. As early as 1892,
prior to biological filters, it was recognized that nitrate prevented putrescence in domestic
sewage treatment. Sanford's theory was that the sodium nitrage would supply oxygen and
prevent the waste from becoming anaerobic; however, the cost was prohibitive and a
compromise sought. After extensive studies Sanborn recommended the application of
sodium nitrate to supply approximately 20 percent of the 5 day BOD when stored in shallow
lagoons. This method effectively controlled odor but did not appreciably increase the rate
of BOD removal.
In the late 1940's, results of pure cultures of Rhodopsendomonas looked promising,
but in actual practice these organisms could not adapt to the environment of the high
strength waste.
Also in the late 1940's odor masking agents were tried. These were basically: 1)
Chlorinated hydrocarbons with concentrated odor material, and 2) products derived from
the perfume industry; but their high costs and intangible results still leave doubt as to their
usefulness.
In about 1950 enzymes were used as an aid to treatment; however, results never met
expectations and their use discouraged. It was about this time many canners became
770

Progress Report on Brooks Foods
Anaerobic-Aerobic Lagoon System for
Tomato Waste
LARRY L. LEPPER, Manager
Research & Quality Control Department
HOWARD R. LACEY, General Manager
Brooks Foods Division
Curtice-Burns, Inc.
Mt. Summit, Indiana 47361
HISTORY
The use of lagoons i n the canning industry dates back nearly to the turn of the century.
Early lagoons were basically built to intercept and hold the waste for long periods of time,
usually a packing season, rather than to allow for continuous discharge to the receiving
stream. Early published work dates back to 1910 (I) and was aimed at utilizing the then existing treatment methods for domestic waste. Examples include reports by Illinois (2), Michigan (3), Wisconsin (4), Ohio (5), New York (6), and Warrich, McKee, Wirth and Sanborn
(7). Unattractive economics and lack of enforcement resulted in few full scale installations.
In the early I930's (8) attempts were directed toward seepage beds or rapid soil
absorption of the wastewater; however, the combination of soil conditions and the high
organic waste characteristics caused this method to fail in that the soil clogged rapidly and
as a result of the high organic loads, odors developed to a point of intolerability.
The next step was an attempt to reduce soil clogging by screening of the waste to
remove gross solids and some of the suspended matter; however, the soils still clogged and
the odors persisted. Then the search began for methods of odor control At that time the
lagoon treatment concept also changed again from absorption to storage. In the early work
(8) it was speculated that by maintaining the lagooned waste in an alkaline pH range that
biological decomposition would be accelerated and an environment created which would be
less attractive to the hydrogen sulfide producing organisms. This was attempted with
sodium hydroxide in pea waste but the result discouraged further investigation. The use of
sodium nitrate as an additive was developed in the early 1940's (9) and Sandborn noted it's
use was for correcting odor problems and not a new treatment method. As early as 1892,
prior to biological filters, it was recognized that nitrate prevented putrescence in domestic
sewage treatment. Sanford's theory was that the sodium nitrage would supply oxygen and
prevent the waste from becoming anaerobic; however, the cost was prohibitive and a
compromise sought. After extensive studies Sanborn recommended the application of
sodium nitrate to supply approximately 20 percent of the 5 day BOD when stored in shallow
lagoons. This method effectively controlled odor but did not appreciably increase the rate
of BOD removal.
In the late 1940's, results of pure cultures of Rhodopsendomonas looked promising,
but in actual practice these organisms could not adapt to the environment of the high
strength waste.
Also in the late 1940's odor masking agents were tried. These were basically: 1)
Chlorinated hydrocarbons with concentrated odor material, and 2) products derived from
the perfume industry; but their high costs and intangible results still leave doubt as to their
usefulness.
In about 1950 enzymes were used as an aid to treatment; however, results never met
expectations and their use discouraged. It was about this time many canners became
770